Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2020

01-03-2020 | Breast Cancer | Health Services Research and Global Oncology

Outcomes for Patients with Residual Stage II/III Breast Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy (AFT-01)

Authors: T. J. Stankowski-Drengler, MD, J. R. Schumacher, PhD, B. Hanlon, PhD, D. Livingston-Rosanoff, MD, K. Van de Walle, MD, C. C. Greenberg, MD, L. G. Wilke, MD, H. B. Neuman, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 3/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy has a demonstrated survival advantage; however, outcomes for non-pCR by receptor status are less understood. We sought to evaluate survival and distant recurrence by receptor status for patients with residual stage II/III breast cancer.

Methods

A stage-stratified random sample of 11,366 patients with stage II–III breast cancer in 2006–2007 was selected from 1217 facilities in the National Cancer Database for a Commission on Cancer Special Study. We identified patients with residual pathologic stage II/III cancer who received standard of care therapy based on receptor status. Distant recurrence and 5-year survival were abstracted and Kaplan–Meier curves were generated by receptor status. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios for death and distant recurrence.

Results

A total of 734 patients had residual disease; 58%, 28%, and 14% were ER or PR+/Her2neu−, ER and PR−/Her2neu−, and Her2neu+ (any ER/PR), respectively. ER and PR−/Her2neu− cancers had the poorest 5-year overall (52% vs. 82% for Her2neu+ and ER or PR+/Her2neu−, p < 0.0001) and distant recurrence-free survival (57% vs. 72% Her2neu+ and 77% ER or PR+/Her2neu, p < 0.0001). Cox regression models demonstrated a higher likelihood of distant recurrence and death for patients with ER and PR−/Her2neu− disease (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.56–3.24 and HR 3.19, 95% CI 2.20–4.64 respectively) compared with ER or PR+/Her2neu−.

Conclusions

Patients with residual ER and PR−/Her2neu− cancer have a significant risk of distant recurrence and mortality compared with other breast cancer types, supporting the consideration for additional adjuvant therapy and novel clinical trials in this cohort.
Trial registry number ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02171078
Literature
1.
Esserman LJ, Berry DA, DeMichele A, et al. Pathologic complete response predicts recurrence-free survival more effectively by cancer subset: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL–CALGB 150007/150012, ACRIN 6657. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(26):3242–9.CrossRef
2.
Houssami N, Macaskill P, von Minckwitz G, Marinovich ML, Mamounas E. Meta-analysis of the association of breast cancer subtype and pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(18):3342–54.CrossRef
3.
Ring AE, Smith IE, Ashley S, Fulford LG, Lakhani SR. Oestrogen receptor status, pathological complete response and prognosis in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2004;91(12):2012–7.CrossRef
4.
Kim H, Park W, Huh SJ, et al. Clinical outcomes according to molecular subtypes in stage II-III breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and radiotherapy. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2017;13(4):329–36.CrossRef
5.
Haque W, Verma V, Hatch S, Suzanne Klimberg V, Brian Butler E, Teh BS. Response rates and pathologic complete response by breast cancer molecular subtype following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;170(3):559–67.CrossRef
6.
Hayashi N, Takahashi Y, Matsuda N, et al. The prognostic effect of changes in tumor stage and nodal status after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in each primary breast cancer subtype. Clin Breast Cancer. 2018;18(2):e219–29.CrossRef
7.
Spring L, Greenup R, Niemierko A, et al. Pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and long-term outcomes among young women with breast cancer. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2017;15(10):1216–23.CrossRef
8.
Ohzawa H, Sakatani T, Niki T, Yasuda Y, Hozumi Y. Pathological responses and survival of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy including trastuzumab. Breast Cancer. 2014;21(5):563–70.CrossRef
9.
Broglio KR, Quintana M, Foster M, et al. Association of pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer with long-term outcomes: a meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(6):751–60.CrossRef
10.
Chollet P, Amat S, Cure H, et al. Prognostic significance of a complete pathological response after induction chemotherapy in operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2002;86(7):1041–6.CrossRef
11.
Liedtke C, Mazouni C, Hess KR, et al. Response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(8):1275–81.CrossRef
12.
Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384(9938):164–72.CrossRef
13.
Yee D, DeMichele A, Isaacs C, et al. Pathological complete response predicts event-free and distant disease-free survival in the I-SPY2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS3-08.
14.
Boughey JC, Ballman KV, McCall LM, et al. Tumor biology and response to chemotherapy impact breast cancer-specific survival in node-positive breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: long-term follow-up from ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance). Ann Surg. 2017;266(4):667–76.CrossRef
15.
Untch M, Fasching PA, Konecny GE, et al. Pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab predicts favorable survival in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-overexpressing breast cancer: results from the TECHNO trial of the AGO and GBG study groups. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(25):3351–7.CrossRef
16.
Symmans WF, Wei C, Gould R, et al. Long-term prognostic risk after neoadjuvant chemotherapy associated with residual cancer burden and breast cancer subtype. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(10):1049–60.CrossRef
17.
Chollet P, Abrial C, Durando X, et al. A new prognostic classification after primary chemotherapy for breast cancer: residual disease in breast and nodes (RDBN). Cancer J. 2008;14(2):128–32.CrossRef
18.
von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer JU, et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(15):1796–804.CrossRef
19.
Bonnefoi H, Litiere S, Piccart M, et al. Pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an independent predictive factor irrespective of simplified breast cancer intrinsic subtypes: a landmark and two-step approach analyses from the EORTC 10994/BIG 1-00 phase III trial. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(6):1128–36.CrossRef
20.
Campbell JI, Yau C, Krass P, et al. Comparison of residual cancer burden, American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and pathologic complete response in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;165(1):181–91.CrossRef
21.
Mallin K, Browner A, Palis B, et al. Incident cases captured in the national cancer database compared with those in U.S. population based central cancer registries in 2012–2014. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:1604–12.CrossRef
22.
Kong X, Moran MS, Zhang N, Haffty B, Yang Q. Meta-analysis confirms achieving pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts favourable prognosis for breast cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47(14):2084–90.CrossRef
23.
Kaplowitz SA, Campo S, Chiu WT. Cancer patients’ desires for communication of prognosis information. Health Commun. 2002;14(2):221–41.CrossRef
24.
Masuda N, Lee SJ, Ohtani S, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(22):2147–59.CrossRef
25.
Papadimitriou M, Mountzios G, Papadimitriou CA. The role of PARP inhibition in triple-negative breast cancer: unraveling the wide spectrum of synthetic lethality. Cancer Treat Rev. 2018;67:34–44.CrossRef
26.
von Minckwitz G, Huang CS, Mano MS, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine for residual invasive HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(7):617–28.CrossRef
27.
Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, et al. Long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: ATLAS, a randomised trial. Lancet. 2013;381(9869):805–16.CrossRef
28.
Gray RG, Rea D, Handley K, et al. aTTom: long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years in 6953 women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:(18_suppl):5.CrossRef
29.
Jinih M, Relihan N, Corrigan MA, O’Reilly S, Redmond HP. Extended adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer: evidence and update: a review. Breast J. 2017;23(6):694–705.CrossRef
30.
Mittendorf EA, Vila J, Tucker SL, et al. The neo-bioscore update for staging breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: incorporation of prognostic biologic factors into staging after treatment. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(7):929–36.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Outcomes for Patients with Residual Stage II/III Breast Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy (AFT-01)
Authors
T. J. Stankowski-Drengler, MD
J. R. Schumacher, PhD
B. Hanlon, PhD
D. Livingston-Rosanoff, MD
K. Van de Walle, MD
C. C. Greenberg, MD
L. G. Wilke, MD
H. B. Neuman, MD
Publication date
01-03-2020
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07846-2

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2020 Go to the issue

ASO Author Reflections

ASO Author Reflections: Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) as a Biomarker of Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Colorectal Cancer

Perioperative Blood Transfusion is Associated with Postoperative Systemic Inflammatory Response and Poorer Outcomes Following Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Long-Term Survival after Minimally Invasive Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Patients in the United States and China

Peritoneal Surface Malignancy

Health-Related Quality of Life After Cytoreductive Surgery/HIPEC for Mucinous Appendiceal Cancer: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Trial Comparing Oxaliplatin and Mitomycin

ASO Author Reflections

ASO Author Reflections: Sublobar Resection En Route to Becoming the Standard of Care for cT1N0 Lung Adenocarcinoma

Thoracic Oncology

Propensity-Matched Analysis Comparing Survival After Sublobar Resection and Lobectomy for cT1N0 Lung Adenocarcinoma